Ducati Sporting Club UK > General > Idle Chat > Speed Camara and then a Camara Van?

[matboyslim]

Originally posted by Guido
In all fairness to the police, you have to say that that is the worst piece of road building I have seen in a long time. What an abortion of a junction that is. What the f*** were the highways thinking when they dreamt up that one!!!!!

If there was ever a call for a roundabout that is it...........

My guess is that the road junction is so bad there that there's a fair few 'incidents' hence the justification for the police to monitor speed in the hope it reduces t-Bones.........

Accident waiting to happen if you ask me.

Having driven the road now for nearly two years ive seen a couple of RTCs on that stretch of road but not on the junction, one just up the road on the left of the picture and one to the right of the picture at the start of the dual carriageway where i took the picture from.

[andyb]

Keefyb, when you say either side do you mean for traffic going in the same direction or on opposite sides of the road?

Monty.I dont make the rules...........(or really enforce them in this style )

You know where i come from with this!

However, theres two arguements here, 1 about placement, and 2 about enforcement.

Camera placement has to be within guidlines, one of them being that they have to be positioned a certain distance inside the signposted limit.
(some may say your given extra distance to adjust your speed to the limit because of the average persons lack of planning. Advanced driving makes you drive post to post on the limit or less, as it is of course a maximum limit and not compulsory)

This also applies to vans and policepersons.

So in Jules example, the camera is where the potential danger is, and the sign is posted outside from that.

[Jools]

Yes mate, it's rubbish.

I've driven that road all my driving life. Going one way you've got traffic turning into the gliding club (that's the entrance just near the van). This traffic is often 4x4's pulling glider trailers and they make a meal of turning into the entrance, which forces dodery old sods to swerve out into the path of people who're making an early dash for the dual carriageway.

Going the other way, (the way the car is going on the left)you've got one of the shortest stretches of dual carriageway known to man which only enables you to get past one, maybe two cars at the most if you're in another car. Not much better on a bike because you're coming over a blind crest in the middle of the dualled bit and into a tightening radius right hander, then the dual cariageway runs out. So you get people committed to making the pass and making some desperate overtakes to get by before the road runs out - just in time for a tractor or something to pull out of the turning on the left. It's a nightmare.

[matboyslim]

Originally posted by Jools
Yes mate, it's rubbish.

I've driven that road all my driving life. Going one way you've got traffic turning into the gliding club (that's the entrance just near the van). This traffic is often 4x4's pulling glider trailers and they make a meal of turning into the entrance, which forces dodery old sods to swerve out into the path of people who're making an early dash for the dual carriageway.

Going the other way, (the way the car is going on the left)you've got one of the shortest stretches of dual carriageway known to man which only enables you to get past one, maybe two cars at the most if you're in another car. Not much better on a bike because you're coming over a blind crest in the middle of the dualled bit and into a tightening radius right hander, then the dual cariageway runs out. So you get people committed to making the pass and making some desperate overtakes to get by before the road runs out - just in time for a tractor or something to pull out of the turning on the left. It's a nightmare.

True! point of picture taken is at brow of said hill and about half way along the carriageway!

[andyb]

Originally posted by Guido
In all fairness to the police, you have to say that that is the worst piece of road building I have seen in a long time. What an abortion of a junction that is. What the f*** were the highways thinking when they dreamt up that one!!!!!

If there was ever a call for a roundabout that is it...........

My guess is that the road junction is so bad there that there's a fair few 'incidents' hence the justification for the police to monitor speed in the hope it reduces t-Bones.........

Accident waiting to happen if you ask me.

You reduce the speed you reduce the injuries......I also thought it looked a bit of a dogs dinner!

[andyb]

One of the things often quoted in "Casualty reduction" matters is the 3 E's.

Enforcement, well you know all about that.

Education, this where Bikecraft and so on came from.

and Engineering, This picture to me looks like somewhere that would benefit from an engineering approach ie a roundabout or something.

That of course is the expensive approach, much more than a camera!

[Monty]

"Monty.I dont make the rules...........(or really enforce them in this style )"
I know mate, I know-wasn't having a pop at you or traffic in general, personally I would rather they got rid of camera's that only take a snap shot of a single point and increased traffic divisions so we had real people out there. That way you might reduce the number of numpties talking on hand held mobiles etc etc. I do about 40,000 miles a year in a car and another 7-10,000 on bikes and the amount of rubbish driving I see amazes me-and I swear it's getting worse. The other evening I came out of the gym with Jo and down to the roundabout on the A428 which is just off the A1-guy with a Mondeo is driving-very slowly-the wrong way round the roundabout. Ignoring the fact that there is a dam great roundabout sign, it doesn't even LOOK like a 'T' junction so how did the pillock do that???
Jules the rule you are refering to with a road having a 'natural speed' is well known in road engineering and is called the 85th percentile.
"The 85th percentile speed is the speed which 85% of the vehicles are not exceeding.
Plenty of research has shown that the safest group of vehicles are travelling at or below the 85th to 90th percentiles. Research shows that crash risk alters with speed, at the 85th to 90th percentiles we tend to find drivers with above average skill and competence, and this is why their crash risk is the lowest. Above the 90th percentile we tend to find drivers exceeding safe limits and their accident risk increases as a consequence. Note that the "average" driver at the 50% percentile has a greater crash risk than the 85th percentile driver. Below the 30th percentile crash risk is significantly increased and these speeds tend to be used by less skilled and competent drivers.

This leads to engineering recommendations that speed limits should normally be set at around the 85th or 90th percentile speed of traffic under good conditions. There may well be some of the very safest drivers somewhat above the 90th percentile, but historically in the UK there has been Police discretion and an "enforcement margin" to avoid penalising these safe drivers. But how things have changed."
Speed limits used to be set by qualified roads engineers using these rules which are universally recognised, now however they are set by council employees who usually will set them way below the 85th percentile and then police them with a camera-in other words if you drive at a 'natural speed' you will likely be exceeding the posted limit and so be procecuted-K-ching!

John

[Edited on 9-3-2005 by Monty]

[HW]

I guess you should see this then ..... double speed traps are coming!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/cumbria/4117503.stm

[Mad Dog Bianchi]

Good article and one that points out the fact that many police figures look at accident rates and determine that speeds have to be reduced in the interest of public safety. Though I don't agree with the full logic of all of that, there is a genuine concern about making the roads safer notwithstanding the 'street smarts' of folks like me who get on the gas right after a speed camera. 50 deaths sounds high for a small area, though I am sure they are not all related to speed.
Anyway, there are fixed cameras here in Japan, but they face forward to get the license and face and they only go off when speed is 30 kmh over posted. Sooooooo, bikes are at least safe from them as there are no front numbers and the eyes alone in a full face helmet will not stand up in court. Mobile units are another story and they are not cameras, just radar traps. Further, there are a number of fairly high performance unmarked patrol cars on the highways and they have high res video cameras that are calibrated with the speed reader. They come up behind you (got caught doing 176 on my STS4) video the whole episode with the speed added to the image and then pull you over. Luckily I was honest with the guys, as they had only been able to get me at 122 on their screen, by telling them I was way over that earlier, way over! They laughed and changed the ticket to a warning! God bless the sense of humor of the Japanese police!
BTW, I hear France is really getting heavy on speed cameras as well. Saw that when I was there in Sept.

[KeefyB]

Originally posted by andyb
Keefyb, when you say either side do you mean for traffic going in the same direction or on opposite sides of the road?

Both of them on the southbound carriageway.
First one one the junction with Ermine st.(Fair enough,busy junction).Second one just after the roundabout,when you are giving it plenty of right foot/hand! (no junctions there!)The vans were about a mile apart.
In hindsight,I guess they could have been from differant forces/councils as the Lincs/Leics border is very close by.